American University professor Allan Lichtman, who has correctly predicted every election since 1984, predicts a Trump win. Thoughts?

This guy came up before. The thing about his prediction is, its about party, not candidate. In any other cycle, using any other candidate, I think his prediction would have worked. Simply put, the GOP should have won this election, but they picked Trump.

American University professor Allan Lichtman, who has correctly predicted every election since 1984, predicts a Trump win. Thoughts?

This guy came up before. The thing about his prediction is, its about party, not candidate. In any other cycle, using any other candidate, I think his prediction would have worked. Simply put, the GOP should have won this election, but they picked Trump.

Lichtman is not a total idiot, but his model is wrong for exactly the reason you said.

American University professor Allan Lichtman, who has correctly predicted every election since 1984, predicts a Trump win. Thoughts?

This guy came up before. The thing about his prediction is, its about party, not candidate. In any other cycle, using any other candidate, I think his prediction would have worked. Simply put, the GOP should have won this election, but they picked Trump.

I agree. I was just wondering if others thought the same.

"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW

American University professor Allan Lichtman, who has correctly predicted every election since 1984, predicts a Trump win. Thoughts?

This guy came up before. The thing about his prediction is, its about party, not candidate. In any other cycle, using any other candidate, I think his prediction would have worked. Simply put, the GOP should have won this election, but they picked Trump.

Lichtman is not a total idiot, but his model is wrong for exactly the reason you said.

But if the GOP had picked someone like... Cruz or Kasich? Do you think his model would work then?

"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW

American University professor Allan Lichtman, who has correctly predicted every election since 1984, predicts a Trump win. Thoughts?

This guy came up before. The thing about his prediction is, its about party, not candidate. In any other cycle, using any other candidate, I think his prediction would have worked. Simply put, the GOP should have won this election, but they picked Trump.

Lichtman is not a total idiot, but his model is wrong for exactly the reason you said.

But if the GOP had picked someone like... Cruz or Kasich? Do you think his model would work then?

Kaisch was the perfect candidate for the GOP this election and they dropped the ball. He was almost promised a win if he was the nominee.

American University professor Allan Lichtman, who has correctly predicted every election since 1984, predicts a Trump win. Thoughts?

This guy came up before. The thing about his prediction is, its about party, not candidate. In any other cycle, using any other candidate, I think his prediction would have worked. Simply put, the GOP should have won this election, but they picked Trump.

Lichtman is not a total idiot, but his model is wrong for exactly the reason you said.

But if the GOP had picked someone like... Cruz or Kasich? Do you think his model would work then?

American University professor Allan Lichtman, who has correctly predicted every election since 1984, predicts a Trump win. Thoughts?

This guy came up before. The thing about his prediction is, its about party, not candidate. In any other cycle, using any other candidate, I think his prediction would have worked. Simply put, the GOP should have won this election, but they picked Trump.

Lichtman is not a total idiot, but his model is wrong for exactly the reason you said.

But if the GOP had picked someone like... Cruz or Kasich? Do you think his model would work then?

Yea, I do think so.

This should have been a very competitive year for the GOP. They had a better than 50% chance with just about anyone, and I mean ANYONE, but had they picked a good candidate, running a good campaign, it would have been almost a sure GOP victory.

American University professor Allan Lichtman, who has correctly predicted every election since 1984, predicts a Trump win. Thoughts?

This guy came up before. The thing about his prediction is, its about party, not candidate. In any other cycle, using any other candidate, I think his prediction would have worked. Simply put, the GOP should have won this election, but they picked Trump.

Lichtman is not a total idiot, but his model is wrong for exactly the reason you said.

But if the GOP had picked someone like... Cruz or Kasich? Do you think his model would work then?

Yea, I do think so.

This should have been a very competitive year for the GOP. They had a better than 50% chance with just about anyone, and I mean ANYONE, but had they picked a good candidate, running a good campaign, it would have been almost a sure GOP victory.

My favorite thing is the people who say they voted for Trump not because of policy, but because he was a winner. The guy was least likely to win in the general election.

I'm thinking that Trump will win the popular vote by 1-2 million votes but not win the presidency as Clinton will take the electoral vote. I base this on the current polling when you look at it state by state.

American University professor Allan Lichtman, who has correctly predicted every election since 1984, predicts a Trump win. Thoughts?

This guy came up before. The thing about his prediction is, its about party, not candidate. In any other cycle, using any other candidate, I think his prediction would have worked. Simply put, the GOP should have won this election, but they picked Trump.

Lichtman is not a total idiot, but his model is wrong for exactly the reason you said.

But if the GOP had picked someone like... Cruz or Kasich? Do you think his model would work then?

Kaisch was the perfect candidate for the GOP this election and they dropped the ball. He was almost promised a win if he was the nominee.

I think you're right. Cruz and others were too conservative on some issues.

"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW

American University professor Allan Lichtman, who has correctly predicted every election since 1984, predicts a Trump win. Thoughts?

This guy came up before. The thing about his prediction is, its about party, not candidate. In any other cycle, using any other candidate, I think his prediction would have worked. Simply put, the GOP should have won this election, but they picked Trump.

Lichtman is not a total idiot, but his model is wrong for exactly the reason you said.

But if the GOP had picked someone like... Cruz or Kasich? Do you think his model would work then?

Yea, I do think so.

This should have been a very competitive year for the GOP. They had a better than 50% chance with just about anyone, and I mean ANYONE, but had they picked a good candidate, running a good campaign, it would have been almost a sure GOP victory.

Yeah. :/ It's unfortunate for people like myself who generally support the GOP, but didn't support Trump in the least.

"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW

American University professor Allan Lichtman, who has correctly predicted every election since 1984, predicts a Trump win. Thoughts?

This guy came up before. The thing about his prediction is, its about party, not candidate. In any other cycle, using any other candidate, I think his prediction would have worked. Simply put, the GOP should have won this election, but they picked Trump.

Lichtman is not a total idiot, but his model is wrong for exactly the reason you said.

But if the GOP had picked someone like... Cruz or Kasich? Do you think his model would work then?

More likely with Kasich than Cruz.

Probably so.

"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW

American University professor Allan Lichtman, who has correctly predicted every election since 1984, predicts a Trump win. Thoughts?

This guy came up before. The thing about his prediction is, its about party, not candidate. In any other cycle, using any other candidate, I think his prediction would have worked. Simply put, the GOP should have won this election, but they picked Trump.

Lichtman is not a total idiot, but his model is wrong for exactly the reason you said.

But if the GOP had picked someone like... Cruz or Kasich? Do you think his model would work then?

Yea, I do think so.

This should have been a very competitive year for the GOP. They had a better than 50% chance with just about anyone, and I mean ANYONE, but had they picked a good candidate, running a good campaign, it would have been almost a sure GOP victory.

Yeah. :/ It's unfortunate for people like myself who generally support the GOP, but didn't support Trump in the least.

I hate what the GOP has become. Sure I am a liberal, its doubtful that I will be voting for a republican regardless how moderate he or she may be, but there is no harm in my mind in a sane counter to my politics. The GOP should be a rational counter to democratic polices. There are many people of good will that will disagree with me, fine.

The problem with the last several POTUS candidates were not that they went conservative enough (as the base has said) or that they weren't strong enough (as the base has said). The GOP faithful have been backed into the corner where only the purest of pure conservative can "win". Or where you have to pick an authoritarian bully-boy to win. The place to start is to stop thinking that the entire electorate is just like them. Not just in skin color, but in how we see politics. I can't count the number of times I have herd "no one likes Obama". Really? Well, it sure looks wrong from polling, and two elections. Conservatives simply need to respect that there is more to the country then the narrow (and narrowing every day) outlook of the far right.

What's truly unfortunate is early on in the el cation process, the 24 hour ne s cycle, along with print and internet media, focus overwhelmingly on 1 or 2 candidates effectively silencing everyone else.

At 11/2/2016 10:07:33 PM, Stymie13 wrote:Cruz would have been almost as polarizing as trump.

Cruz (its possible) was the only candidate less likely to get elected. Regardless, he would have run a campaign like a real politician, and STILL been as big a d1ck as Trump.

What's truly unfortunate is early on in the el cation process, the 24 hour ne s cycle, along with print and internet media, focus overwhelmingly on 1 or 2 candidates effectively silencing everyone else.

At 11/2/2016 10:07:33 PM, Stymie13 wrote:Cruz would have been almost as polarizing as trump.

Cruz (its possible) was the only candidate less likely to get elected. Regardless, he would have run a campaign like a real politician, and STILL been as big a d1ck as Trump.

What's truly unfortunate is early on in the el cation process, the 24 hour ne s cycle, along with print and internet media, focus overwhelmingly on 1 or 2 candidates effectively silencing everyone else.

My mom was in town when Cruz announced his candidacy. We were driving somewhere and she had it on the radio. Listening to him saved me nearly 2 years of not having to pay attention to a dam thing he said.

At 11/2/2016 10:07:33 PM, Stymie13 wrote:Cruz would have been almost as polarizing as trump.

Cruz (its possible) was the only candidate less likely to get elected. Regardless, he would have run a campaign like a real politician, and STILL been as big a d1ck as Trump.

What's truly unfortunate is early on in the el cation process, the 24 hour ne s cycle, along with print and internet media, focus overwhelmingly on 1 or 2 candidates effectively silencing everyone else.

My mom was in town when Cruz announced his candidacy. We were driving somewhere and she had it on the radio. Listening to him saved me nearly 2 years of not having to pay attention to a dam thing he said.

At 11/2/2016 10:07:33 PM, Stymie13 wrote:Cruz would have been almost as polarizing as trump.

Cruz (its possible) was the only candidate less likely to get elected. Regardless, he would have run a campaign like a real politician, and STILL been as big a d1ck as Trump.

What's truly unfortunate is early on in the el cation process, the 24 hour ne s cycle, along with print and internet media, focus overwhelmingly on 1 or 2 candidates effectively silencing everyone else.

My mom was in town when Cruz announced his candidacy. We were driving somewhere and she had it on the radio. Listening to him saved me nearly 2 years of not having to pay attention to a dam thing he said.

Apples autocorrect really sux aZZ!

He is such a horses as$$. A smart horses a$$, but...

In my old age I incorrectly think they all are. Really though, the congress person life is just doing what others do: trying to keep their job. Some are azzes, some are good people, some are full in the blank.

At 11/2/2016 10:07:33 PM, Stymie13 wrote:Cruz would have been almost as polarizing as trump.

Cruz (its possible) was the only candidate less likely to get elected. Regardless, he would have run a campaign like a real politician, and STILL been as big a d1ck as Trump.

What's truly unfortunate is early on in the el cation process, the 24 hour ne s cycle, along with print and internet media, focus overwhelmingly on 1 or 2 candidates effectively silencing everyone else.

My mom was in town when Cruz announced his candidacy. We were driving somewhere and she had it on the radio. Listening to him saved me nearly 2 years of not having to pay attention to a dam thing he said.

Apples autocorrect really sux aZZ!

He is such a horses as$$. A smart horses a$$, but...

In my old age I incorrectly think they all are. Really though, the congress person life is just doing what others do: trying to keep their job. Some are azzes, some are good people, some are full in the blank.

Some are good, well intention people. However, not one of them I would like to spend any time with as a friend. Not one.

At 11/2/2016 10:07:33 PM, Stymie13 wrote:Cruz would have been almost as polarizing as trump.

Cruz (its possible) was the only candidate less likely to get elected. Regardless, he would have run a campaign like a real politician, and STILL been as big a d1ck as Trump.

What's truly unfortunate is early on in the el cation process, the 24 hour ne s cycle, along with print and internet media, focus overwhelmingly on 1 or 2 candidates effectively silencing everyone else.

My mom was in town when Cruz announced his candidacy. We were driving somewhere and she had it on the radio. Listening to him saved me nearly 2 years of not having to pay attention to a dam thing he said.

Apples autocorrect really sux aZZ!

He is such a horses as$$. A smart horses a$$, but...

In my old age I incorrectly think they all are. Really though, the congress person life is just doing what others do: trying to keep their job. Some are azzes, some are good people, some are full in the blank.

Some are good, well intention people. However, not one of them I would like to spend any time with as a friend. Not one.

I'm not an Obama supporter but I'd like to school him in ball (he has me by a couple inches but I got serious hops. I can still dunk at 43).

George sr. I'd like to sky dive with.George W would be fun to mountain bike with.

American University professor Allan Lichtman, who has correctly predicted every election since 1984, predicts a Trump win. Thoughts?

Ive heard of the guy, but he made a mistake in attributing Gary Johnson as a major third party candidate who acts as a spoiler. If Johnson gets below 5% of the vote, which he will, then that third party point the professor counted for Trump instead goes to Clinton, swinging the outcome in her favor

Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

American University professor Allan Lichtman, who has correctly predicted every election since 1984, predicts a Trump win. Thoughts?

This guy came up before. The thing about his prediction is, its about party, not candidate. In any other cycle, using any other candidate, I think his prediction would have worked. Simply put, the GOP should have won this election, but they picked Trump.

Lichtman is not a total idiot, but his model is wrong for exactly the reason you said.

But if the GOP had picked someone like... Cruz or Kasich? Do you think his model would work then?

Kaisch was the perfect candidate for the GOP this election and they dropped the ball. He was almost promised a win if he was the nominee.

I think Obama himself went on record saying that he saw Kasich and Rubio as big 'threats' in terms of likelihood of winning the election if they were the nominee

Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

At 11/2/2016 6:40:53 PM, tommylibertarian1 wrote:I'm thinking that Trump will win the popular vote by 1-2 million votes but not win the presidency as Clinton will take the electoral vote. I base this on the current polling when you look at it state by state.

I think this is true and I might lock myself in a bomb shelter for a couple of months to avoid the whining and riots from trump and hisSupporters